Ken Braun: 'Redskins' has got to go as Washington football team's moniker

There’s no question political correctness has run amok. A telling example is the Washington D.C. mayoral aide who lost his job in 1999 after properly using the adjective “niggardly” to describe the city budget. He was not the first nor the last to run afoul of PC police who mistakenly believe the word - which means “stingy” - is derived from a highly offensive and similar-sounding (but completely not related) racial slur.

It was one of many low points for political correctness. If those who become easily insulted due to their own illiteracy are permitted to control our speech, then we won’t have much of a language left. Use of “niggardly” was (and is) worth protecting on principle alone.

However, not every effort to push an allegedly offensive word out of bounds is rooted in ignorant hypersensitivity. The controversy over the name of the “Washington Redskins” is more complex than conservative critics believe.

There is no question the team and the NFL should make up their own mind about what to do. But just because Rachel Maddow and the liberal outrage industry are on one side doesn’t make the opposing foxhole a smart refuge.

Human indecency has created at least one widely-known insulting slur to stigmatize each color and culture. The honorable side of our nature calls us to have the class to avoid using these words. Our honesty and intellect leaves no choice but to conclude that “redskin” is the strongest contender for being the most widely known insult we have devised to defame the first known residents of North America.

A counterpoint often raised is the notion of a “person of this race who is not offended by the word.” This defense is also used as an excuse to deploy the dreaded “N” word. Example: “My friend is black and says this all the time …”

That’s crap, of course. Any non-black person with a brain knows not to shout that as a greeting upon entering a saloon full of black patrons. Likewise, the same would not be done with “redskin” in a Chippewa-filled room.

Just as tellingly, shouting “Hello, Chippewa!” wouldn’t have remotely the same offending power, if it had any at all. There’s a world of difference between the Central Michigan University nickname and the one used by Washington’s NFL team. That difference says all you need to know about the potent offending power of “redskin.”

Earlier this year, Saturday Night Live ran a skit entitled “DJesus Uncrossed,” satirically depicting a Savior who arises from the dead and - rather than peacefully forgiving sins - exacts murderous vengeance. To the extent it deserved laughs at all, it was because it deliberately traded on the overwhelmingly positive association of Christ with peace and nonviolence. It was a clumsy compliment: If any audience really thought Jesus were remotely violent and vengeful, there would have been no mirth to make by putting a sword in his hand.

Yet, many of the conservatives now rushing to the defense of the Washington Redskins were quick to take offense at the SNL skit and denounce it as blasphemy. Out of respect for the perceived insult, Sears reportedly pulled its advertising.

Well, part of respecting one another means listening when a plausible case is made that a word is uniquely offensive to a culture. If there’s no great harm done to our language by giving up everyday use of the slur, then people of goodwill should do so. “Redskin” should remain a word, but not one that thoughtful and charitable Americans say often and with a smile.

Ken Braun was a legislative aide for a Republican lawmaker in the Michigan House for six years and is currently the director of policy for a political consulting firm. His employer is not responsible for what he says here ... or in Spartan Stadium on game days.